roseweird posted:lessons, i'm interested in your thought process here but i think there is a deeper reading of butler available to you. yes, she says the things you say she says, but she says them (i believe) only in service of disrupting a mode of thought that has probably become increasingly less relevant since—when was gender trouble published, 1993?—and then reintegrating their parts into a more sensitive and precise mode of evaluating human integrity and communication. the most important thing imo to take away from gender trouble is not a coherent political proposal but her overall vision of iteration and performance... self as a series of bodily iterations—iteration (imitation with modification) is the essential link between not only parts and tenses of self but between self and other... idk, that's getting out of the territory of what's covered in gender trouble though. if you are interested in butler at all and have not yet read giving an account of the self i really cannot encourage it enough, her earlier work makes much more sense philosophically and historically in light of it.
There's explicit political parallels in that part of gender trouble to laclau & moffe's thoughts on democracy as an exclusionary process predicated on the removal of social segments, a process which ends up rearticulating what democracy means in the first place. i don't know if it's "the most important" part of gender trouble or not, but it is a significant part of Butler's politics (what little I know about them), and that was what we asked Lessons about, so there's no point in saying "the book also has this other stuff in it, it's great" because he didn't ever say it didn't have that.
edit: lessons answered, this post is useless
roseweird posted:forgive me, i think i mentioned it's been a while (like, maybe 5 years) since i read this, so i may have just forgotten all but my favorite parts about iteration, etc. again i would have to reread to really engage your opinion, though, i may have glossed over them out of agreement, honestly? because i think mostly the thing is i don't probably disagree with you about butler, just your tone about her... like, yeah, i don't agree with universalizing identity projects either. i think her conclusions are grave and upsetting, and also correct.
Honestly I was trying for a fairly impartial reading, I wouldn't disagree per se with every point you quoted there but they seemed necessary to raise since they're controversial. Where I do definitely disagree is her conclusions based on those premises, she's a self-proclaimed "anti-emancipationist", but ultimately some form of emancipatory politics is necessary to get anywhere. Rather than trying to incorporate some elements of it into a new political program (or non-program which is what Butler seems to want) we should try to address the problems Butler raises as best we can rather than deciding they're insoluble based on the existence of power.
roseweird posted:palafox posted:There's explicit political parallels in that part of gender trouble to laclau & moffe's thoughts on democracy as an exclusionary process predicated on the removal of social segments, a process which ends up rearticulating what democracy means in the first place
also stop talking down to me please? laclau and moffe? i think i had that for breakfast. who cares? we're talking about butler
The only reason anyone here cares about Laclau and Moffe is because getfiscal spent a year using them to justify his decision to vote Tory, it's despicable.
discipline posted:MadMedico posted:
discipline posted:
hey mad medico I don't care if every porn actress in california is healthier and more well-adjusted, as well as better paid, than all other women in the world combined it's still misogynist propaganda used to discipline women and men who defend the production and use of it are pathetic
Well except there really hasn't been any objective scientific data showing that porn causes societal harm or strong studies showing a link between porn use and violence.
beep borp can you show me the studies where the amount of porn you watch and the amount of faceless pussy you pay to pound has a positive correlation to how empowered and human the john believes women are and how much more he treats them with human dignity as a sex? thanks in advance you fedora-wearing lunatic you
People of both genders patronize sex workers for a variety of reasons, but again I don't see how that has to do with this assertion that if a person orgasms while looking at an image of a naked woman it magically rewires their brain. Tens of thousands of people regularly use porn but would never visit a prostitute.
MadMedico posted:People of both genders patronize sex workers for a variety of reasons,
I was gonna start mocking you post per usual but then i remembered last week a conversation between two mid-30yo JAPs i overheard in williamsburg last week, one of them asked "how was hunks?" and the other said "awful" and she looked so tired and miserable 
swampman posted:MadMedico posted:People of both genders patronize sex workers for a variety of reasons,
I was gonna start mocking you post per usual but then i remembered last week a conversation between two mid-30yo JAPs i overheard in williamsburg last week, one of them asked "how was hunks?" and the other said "awful" and she looked so tired and miserable
whats "hunks"?
c_man posted:swampman posted:MadMedico posted:People of both genders patronize sex workers for a variety of reasons,
I was gonna start mocking you post per usual but then i remembered last week a conversation between two mid-30yo JAPs i overheard in williamsburg last week, one of them asked "how was hunks?" and the other said "awful" and she looked so tired and miserable
whats "hunks"?
it's like a strip club, but in reverse. very feminist.
roseweird posted:palafox posted:There's explicit political parallels in that part of gender trouble to laclau & moffe's thoughts on democracy as an exclusionary process predicated on the removal of social segments, a process which ends up rearticulating what democracy means in the first place
also stop talking down to me please? laclau and moffe? i think i had that for breakfast. who cares? we're talking about butler
well, they're who butler cites there, no one's talking down to anybody. it's weird to be angry about someone citing a source
discipline posted:like that's either the most shallow troll in the world or you actually have serious social/mental problems. either way you are remarkably incompetent at both learning and trying to formulate ideas
This is coming from someone who believes in a shadowy "pimp lobby".
c_man posted:i never understood the point of strip clubs. it sounds miserable to begin with.
you can get someone to touch on and around your genital, and as long as you have money xhe will pretend to like you. and if you wanna be gross within certain limits that vary from state to state, there is nobody around to judge you. it's pretty straightforward.
swampman posted:c_man posted:i never understood the point of strip clubs. it sounds miserable to begin with.
you can get someone to touch on and around your genital, and as long as you have money xhe will pretend to like you. and if you wanna be gross within certain limits that vary from state to state, there is nobody around to judge you. it's pretty straightforward.
oic
discipline posted:Total incompetence is thinking that a billion dollar oppressive transnational industry does not have a lobby made driven by oppressors in this the year of our lord 2014
Do they have offices on K Street? You'd think if they had all that money and influence, decriminalization of sex work wouldn't be such a fringe position in mainstream political discourse in the United States.
roseweird posted:in an alternate universe where you'd ever address me as 'girl'
i have no idea what you're talking about, but this is just depressing. you don't seem well and I hope you feel good and get back to your baseline, good postin' self.
MadMedico posted:People of both genders patronize sex workers for a variety of reasons, but again I don't see how that has to do with this assertion that if a person orgasms while looking at an image of a naked woman it magically rewires their brain. Tens of thousands of people regularly use porn but would never visit a prostitute.
yep, it's pretty silly to assert that language and texts exist in the world and impact the way we perceive and think about that world. beep bloop bort, welcome to the rhizzone. *burns all my books on semiotics, cultural studies, with extra lighter fluid over the lacan*
discipline posted:I'm for the complete 100% decriminalization of prostituted women. I get hell from slime like yourself because I think johns, pimps and traffickers should be doggedly humiliated and punished.
mens rights post
MadMedico posted:discipline posted:like that's either the most shallow troll in the world or you actually have serious social/mental problems. either way you are remarkably incompetent at both learning and trying to formulate ideas
This is coming from someone who believes in a shadowy "pimp lobby".
lol